I watched Top Ten Combat rifles and I really could NOT agree with the show.

As listed on the show...

1. AK; I don't own one and don't plan on it and I really don't care for the rifle. But, history has proven this a THE combat rifle for the last century

2. M16; I train with this rifle and own an AR15. It has a purpose, but I won't consider taking it into combat.

3. Lee-Enfield SMLE; I own several versions of this rifle and it is effective.

4. M1 Garand; I own one and have done some heavy plinking with this rifle. It was a major advance over the previous combat rifles.

5. FN FAL; I own this rifle and the FN 49 I really like this rifle and this is one of personal choices for a combat rifle.

6. Mauser M98; Great rifle! I own several and have all most every version.

7. Steyr AUG; I don't own one and haven't shot one. There seems to be little history and I don't feel it has proven itself to be a 10 top combat rifle. I feel its only real claim to fame is that it is the 1st bull pup rifle used by a military.

8. 1903 Springfield; Great Rifle! It’s a Mauser!!

9. Sturmgewehr 44; I don't own one. I would love to. I haven't shot one. I seen and heard it shoot. I think it is on the wrong list. This should be on the top ten machine guns. Not combat rifles.

10. M14; Great rifle. Limited use!! Not in service very long.

My top 10 list of combat rifles.

1. AK; Time proven, used all over the world by almost everyone.

2. Mauser 98; Time proven, used all over the world by almost everyone. Later used as the basis for bench rest shooting. Also, used by professional hunters in Africa.

3. Mosin Nagant 1891/30; Used by poorly trained Soviets and held off the Great German War machine. This is not a great rifle, but has a place in history.

4. FN FAL; Effect rifle and time proven design. Still has a place on most battle fronts today.

5. HK G3; I own one. This is the Mercedes of the combat rifles! This rifle set the standard for combat rifles for the last century.

6. M1 Garand; The rifle set the standard for combat rifles for the 1st half of the last century.

7. SKS; Decent rifle. It equipped most communist countries for the 1st half of the last century. Easily used for lesser trained soldiers.

8. Tokarev SVT-40; Good Rifle. I like mine. It is accurate, reliable, and fun to shoot. This rifle beat back the German war machine.

9. Lee-Enfield SMLE; Good rifle. This rifle is effective and easy to shoot, used all over the world in lots of skirmishes.

10. M16; It is an ok rifle. I really don't considerate it an effective combat rifle other than the fact it went head to head with the AK and SKS rifles which are both top ten combat rifles.

opinions?
Wedskid

One word about the M-16. It is one of the most revolutionary rifles ever. It was way ahead of its time. Other than that good list.

The M16 rifle is ok. I had the "pleasure" of shooting the M16A1. I was adopted into military service before it was ready. It needed lots more R&D in both design and refinement of materials. I was issued the M16A2 for years and just a couple of years ago I was issued the M16A4 rifle. My confidence in the M16A4 is fairly high. I feel my overall confidence would be higher if it was chambered in .260REM or 7mm-08. If it were WEDSKID's choice, money, and responsibility to the soldiers carrying the rifle, I have more confidence in the HK G3 or FN FAL.

My decision for making it number 10 on my list stands that it went head to head with #1 and #7 rifles on the Top 10 Combat rifles. If it hadn't gone head to head with those rifles it wouldn't be 10 and I would have made either the M14, Johnson M1941, AG-42 Ljungman, FN49, or the IMI Galil my number 10 rifle. Then of those my number 10 rifle would be the Johnson M1941.

My opinion...
WEDSKID

Can't agree with your list or theirs.

FN-FAL? Frequently found jammed by sand next to dead Israelis in the first (modern) war with Egypt. Gen. Moshe Dyan called the AK "the Tiger of the Desert." The FN weighs a freakin' ton, and is too long for a modern combat rifle. Accurate on the range, finicky in the field. Too big and heavy to hump with a full combat load.

SMLE ("smelly") 303s? There's a reason you could buy them for $39 in used gun shops. More combatants have been killed with .45-70 trapdoor Calvary carbines than 303 Enfields.The 303 cartridge is underpowered for the weight of the weapon, and in military issue, not all that accurate. I'd rather go to war with a 30-30 lever gun.

AKs. You make some broad statements about this firearm, hoss. Let's see, armies that DON'T carry issue AKs: USA, UK, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, S. Korea, Rep. of China, Belgium, Austria, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, France, Iran, Israel, Ukraine, Singapore, Thailand, Argentina, Brazil, and a whole bunch of others. Used all over the world? Yes. By everyone? Not hardly. Gun most commonly shown on TV firing full-auto up in the air at no one in particular by smiling middle-eastern dissident? Definitely.

I've trained with and fired the AK (multiple variants), and yeah, it's a fairly reliable bullet-launcher, but there were so many variations and knock-offs it's hard to lump them into one gun. They're heavy, they rattle, and recoil is not enjoyable in shorter models. I wouldn't pick up a 60s-era Chicom "AK-47" unless everything else was broken and out of ammo, and maybe only then to kill myself to avoid capture.

HK G3 - Great rifle, but I've seen quite a few of the issue models refuse to extract an empty cartridge in the field in Germany, leaving a soldier with a 10-lb. club. As far as I'm concerned, okay for the range, wouldn't want it in battle. Nearly every country that issued a variant of this rifle has replaced it, and not with another HK.

SKS. Geez, come on -- considered "top ten" by sheer force of numbers only? Dumped by the gazillions on whoever wanted to "rise up" for Communism. I'd be willing to bet more soldiers died of wounds from the Brown Bess or the 1861 Springfield Rifle Musket than from all SKS in the world.

The M16. You call it only an "ok rifle" and place it at the bottom of the list of big, heavy guns you own and have shot, but probably never humped the boonies with for a long period of time. A top combat rifle needs to be capable of delivering accurate and suppresive fire on an enemy by the soldier who carried it through Hell and high water. The M16 is about the best rifle made for an Infantryman: lightweight, tack-driver accurate, durable, versatile, PROVEN, and allows him to carry a large combat load of ammo. In a firefight, I'd rather have 300 rounds of 5.56 than 250 rounds of 7.62 NATO (or that inaccurate, poorly made factory Russian issued 7.62x39 short crap). I carried an M203 in Vietnam, and it never let me down.

If I had to go walk into battle today, I'd grab up an M16/M4 variant without hesitation or regrets. If I had to choose from older (pre-60s) weapons shooting something in a .30 caliber, I think an old Italian Beretta BM-59 would best handle the chores. If laws prevented me from having an autoloader, a current model Remington pump action .223 or .308 would be my preference.

You say you won't consider taking an M16 into combat, but that statement means you imagine you have a choice. Soldiers of Armed Forces are issued their firearms, they rarely get to pick. What makes a combat rifle the top gun is the battles fought and won where it was carried by armed forces, period. Heck if I could have my choice, a Hughes mini-gun in a speed-of-light hovercraft that was completely bulletproof and invisible would probably be nice. But if I gotta carry something in the field all day/every day and know it's gonna get hairy in the near future, the M16 is a better choice than anything you got on your list.

Just my 2 cents -- your mileage may vary.

Couldn't of said it better myself

jumpingrunt is spot on.

jumpingrunt gave a very well thought out response to the original post. Using to criteria for the top ten I think they got it right. When you consider length of service and numbers used the AK series and the M-16 series are the top two. There will always be debate about the bolt action rifles on the list. Quite frankly the Brits used the SMLE for as long as they did for the simple reason that they could not make anything better. They could not adopt the Garand because the ammunition was not compatible. As for WEDSKIDs assertation that the Stu 44 was a machinegun and not a combat rifle is absolutely wrong. It was no more a machinegun than the AK or the M-16. In fact the Stu 44 was the rifle the AK was copied to make. It quite properly belongs on the list as the FIRST true Assault Rifle. Oh, by the way, the HK G3 is the descendant of the Stu 44.

The Tokarev SVT-40 does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with any of the other weapons discussed. It was a limited issue weapon that was unreliable for general field use. It was a successful snipers weapon where the sniper had time to devote to the careful maintenance the weapon required. It beat back no war machine, ever.

The Mosin-Nagant was used by the Russian army because, like the Brits, they could not make anything better on their own. Colonel Mosin copied the Belgian Nagant and modified it to avoid patent infringement with Mauser. As soon as Anatoly Kalashnikov was able to make his automatic rifle workable the Russian Army dropped the Mosin Nagant as fast as possible.

While the M1 Garand is the best rifle of World War 2, it had one of the shortest service lives in the history of the US Army. It can be argued that the M-14 was a refinement of the M-1. While it used the technology developed by John Garand, the M-14 took it to the next level.

I carried M-16 series rifles for my Army career. The M-16 is a reliable capable battle rifle. It has good accuracy, adequate hitting power, it is easy to use and maintain. To me the maintenance aspect of the M-16 is what makes it to me number 1. Every other auto rifle used by the Armies of the world before the M-16 used an operating rod system. Eugene Stoner was a genius when he figured out how to tap the propellant gasses directly. Make to rifle more reliable by eliminating a lot of extra parts that could break down. The only reason the M-16 had problems in Viet Nam was the "cost cutting" measures the Mac Namara "whiz kids" imposed on it. What most people do not realize is the M16A1 is what Stoner intended the rifle to be from the beginning. Things like a chrome lined barrel and cleaning kits were eliminated from the early versions of the rifle because bean counters thought they knew what was better for the weapon than the engineer who designed it.

This post is not intended to start any arguments. It is simply my humble opinion.

I've got to agree with jumpingrunt. When I was an active duty infantry officer we used the M16A1 and that was fine. Most of us yearned for the CAR "shorty" version that was strictly used by SOF back then. I'd like an M4 with an M203 underneath if I had to hump a ruck again. When I went into the IRR I managed a branch transfer to being a DAT (Dumb A$$ Tanker) and I have to say that I much prefer ANY and all of the systems of death delivery on the Abrams to most anything carried by the grunts. Except maybe the MK19. That's a pretty kewl plinker.

I don't know that I would agree with wedskid's other choices for the list but as jumpingrunt said, mileage may vary. As far as jumpingrunt's choice of a pump 308 or 223 if a semi auto is not an option, I'd probably opt instead for a bolt Steyr Scout Rifle in .308.

hey wedskid, where do you get all those WWII guns? i really want to get a whole collection of them and i dont know where to get them besides the internet.

I agree with most ,but the Browning Automatic Rifle or BAR is a honorable mention.

I disagreed with the service length given to the M14. While not a front line weapon, it was still in service wiith the Navy in shipboard armories. It was on the submarine I was aboard in 1979 and an aircraft carrier in 1985.

i agree with jumpingrunt 100%.

Regarding the Lee Enfield.

1) Let's not forget it probably has the longest service life of any rifle. 1895 until 1956 in british frontline service and still used in some places now. To me that makes it number 1 without a doubt.
2) British stuck with it during WWII for several reasons. Main was they didn't want an automatic/semi auto weapon for the general grunts as they wanted to encourage economical shooting. And lastly of course it's a damned effective weapon, reliable, flexible and was already in production. Changing to a different rifle, especially after Dunkirk when a lot where left behind, would have been impractical.
3) The primary british Machine guns used the same ammo. Makes a lot of sense having commonality accross all primary weapons.

Kudos to both wedskid and jumpingrunt for being on topic and showing a good knowledge of combat rifles.
Having served in Law Enforcement for 28 years, I made it a practice to beg if I had to in order to shoot something that I either liked or hadn't fired and wanted to.

So instead of putting down my own list, I'll just take your guys lists and add my own comments. Note that I'm not putting them in a 1-10 order, just adding my $0.02.

(1) AK-47-Own one [semi-auto only] and love to
shoot it. Main reason, the 7.62x39 round is
inexpensive to reload. and by "tweaking"
the round just a little, I can make up for
most of its inherent inaccuracy. My nephew
bought the AK-74, which is just ok, but not
me going out any buying reload dies for it.
(2) FN-FAL? Don't own but have fired.
jumpingrunt's post pretty well sums this
one up: FN-FAL? [QUOTE] Frequently found
jammed by sand next to dead Israelis in
the first (modern) war with Egypt. Gen.
Moshe Dyan called the AK "the Tiger of the
Desert." The FN weighs a freakin' ton, and
is too long for a modern combat rifle.
Accurate on the range, finicky in the
field. Too big and heavy to hump with a
full combat load. Gen. Dyan must have been
firing this one with his bad eye.
(3) 1903 Springfield - Own one and is on the
list of rifles I'll never part with. Gotta
go with wedskid on this one.
(4) M-1 Garand. This is also on the list that
I'll never part with. Really wouldn't want
to have to lug it into battle along with a
full pack, though.
(5) Steyer AUG-Don't own one but have put maybe
500 rounds through one. Our Sheriff's
Department bought 2 for their ESU team for
use by the snipers [there are better
choices, IMHO. This rifle has been around
for probably 20 years. The integral scope/
carrying handle is just ok; could use a
better scope. But it's raised a little so
you can use the fixed sights if you want
to. My shooting of this weapon was limited
to 100 yards [the length of the range I
had access to at the time.] It held a good
group for me, but I wouldn't press it
much past 100 yards with that. A plus, the
scope/handle is solid, so you're not likely
to knock the scope out of alignment. A
minus, the scope/handle is solid, so you're
not going to take it off and attach a better
scope. The Bullpup design can be switched
to eject either left or right, but it clears
clears well and shooting from the left
shoulder and ejecting right, I didn't get
any hot brass bouncing off my head or up
my nose.
(6) M-16. Top notch in my book. Had a fellow
Officer that collected and he had one in a
9mm heavy barrel, in addition to the .223.
Surprisingly that little 9mm packed quite a
punch. Never seen another one since. I've
put quite a few rounds through his .223 and
when I bought mine [ok, I got a buddy that
deals in the Bushmaster and I bought one of
those, saving about $500.] If I had to go
into battle today, it'd definitely be the
M16/M4 with the M203 grenade launcher
underneath [yeah, I like to blow stuff up
too.]
(7) Not on the list, but Remington 700BDL in
.308 csl. With a 10x variable scope, this is
one "dead on balls" accurate weapon, equal
in every respect to my 1903 Springfield.
(8) Last, but not least, one that you won't
find on the list, because it's from my
Law Enforcement days and isn't really a
rifle. With our battles being fought in
an Urban Combat setting, nothing beats
a good old 12-ga Shotgun for sweeping &
clearing a room. We were issued the good old
Remington 870. Being a left-handed shooter,
I had to reach my middle finger under and to
the right of the trigger guard to release
the safety. But we had one Mossberg 500 that
had the safety on top, IMHO where it should
be, so I claimed that. And for a little more
mass/bang for the buck, I used #4 Buck in
lieu of our issued 00 Buck.
That's my $0.02

Bob

This show bugs me to no end, sometimes. They get a lot of talking heads, military experts, and such, and it seems that very few of them ever held a rifle, let alone personally shot all 10 on this list. They go on and laud praise or critism on every rifle, capriously, then gush over the AK47.

I have in one form or another own or have owned, or have a friend who owns / owned just about every rifle on this list, except for the StG44 and the Steyr AUG.

1. AK47 / AKM47 / AK74
I don't have a problem with this rifle being number one. I do have a huge problem why they claim it should be number one. This is not a fine rifle. Accuracy is mediocre, at best. Handling is poor. It has all the right pieces in all the wrong places. (I finally learned how to perform the single handed magazine change from the Spetnaz show from Weaponology. ) The rifle is somewhat clumsy. The balance of the gun makes and the odd comb angle of the stock points the natural point of aim lower that your sight picture. The sight radius is just horrible. The ammo is powerful enough, but not particulary accurate. One could reliably hit a man sized target at 200 yards, but we're talking about 10" groups at best.

I've shot a fully automatic version and own a semi-auto civilian version. (It was really cheap back in 1999.) It is fun, easy to use, and the ammo was plentiful and inexpensive. Utterly reliable, and nearly indestructable.

This gun is NOT innovative. The StG44 proved that. If this rifle should be number one, it's because it is idiot proof, and there are probably over 50 million of them out there. It does its job of spitting out lead, and it does it well.

2. M16
I've shot an M16A1 and I own several AR15s in different configurations. I would take this rifle into combat, because I know it and trust it. I'm also of small stature, and I like the low recoil and light weight of this rifle. Are there more reliable rifles out there? Sure, but I take care of mine, and they never have let me down. Stopping power? Yeah, the 5.56x45mm NATO round (M855 / SS109) and the old M193 weren't powerhouse past 250 yards. But at least, I could hit targets that far and much farther out with my rifle. I'm good to 500+ yards on a decent day. CMP shooters can group tight shots at 600 yards with accurized versions of this rifle.

If your target doesn't go down with the first shot, pull the trigger again, and repeat as necessary.

3. Lee Enfield SMLE - No.1 MkIII*, No.4, No.5 Jungle Carbine
This rifle probably should have been number 1.
The final battle rifle of the British Empire, and probably one of the best bolt action rifle designs ever devised. I own a few of them, and never wish to part with them. They have probably the smoothest action in a military rifle. One can easily get off 10 aimed shots in 15 seconds with reasonable accuracy, especially with the slightly heavier No3.

The Jungle Carbine is fun to handle, but a harsh rifle to shoot.

4. M1 Garand
I own one... my friend owns one. His friend owns one. For the time, it was a great battle rifle. If given another 15 years to work on his rifle, John Garand would have probably made an M14 in .30-06... maybe.

5. FN FAL
I want one. I like it. My friend owns one... and sold it to someone else. (Some friend )
A bit heavy, but it's available in paratrooper configuration with a folding stock. Accuracy is acceptable. - Not as good as the HK G3 / HK91.

6. Mauser Gewehr M1898 / K98k
I own a few, and love them all. I would not feel undergunned taking one of these into battle. They should probably have combined this rifle with the M1903 Springfield. (They combined the F-86 Sabre and the MiG-15 in Top Ten Fighers.) While this rifle wasn't truly innovative, it was the one which brought all of the good ideas together into one package.

7. Steyr AUG / Gewehr 77
Want one. Can't afford them. We don't import them. The new American made knock offs are so expensive. If something should have scored high in innovation, it's this rifle. One receiver can do many jobs with 4 different barrels. Yeah, there are some inherent problems with most bullpup designs, but it looks like Steyr has address the really major ones. The Australians are giving them high marks for their performance in East Timor.

8. Springfield M1903
Own a M1903 and M1903A3, sold a M1903A1.
An American Mauser replacement for the Krag... and a pretty darn good one. However, it was the M1917 Enfield that really carried the U.S. Army in World War I and in the early stages of World War II in the Philippines.

9. Sturm Gewehr StG44
The first true assault rifle. This is a select fire rifle, not a machine gun. I've seen and hear it shoot too. It belongs here just as the AK47, M16, FAL, Steyr, and M14 (before the military removed its select fire capability). Its cyclic rate of fire is no faster than any of those other rifles. In fact, it is only around 550 rounds per minute. The AK47 and M16A1 shoot much faster at 650 and 700+, respectively.

10. M14 (a.k.a. The Garand revised)
I love mine. Don't get me wrong, but I would not take this long, heavy rifle into combat. Huffing this rifle and its ammo would kill me. (Yeah, I am a wuss.)

It's better than the M1 Garand. It's accurate. It hits hard. It's reliable and well-built. It's still in service and doing a job in the Navy, the Marines and in the Army in the sandbox of Iraq and Afghanistan. For an interesting sidenote, check out the Italian BM59. In looks and on paper, it should remind you of something.

Limited service life? That depends on what you call service. High power match shooters only recently in the last decade converted to AR15s.

My list would look more like this:

1. Lee Enfield - Millions made. 2 World Wars and countless battles prior to.

2. AK47 / AK74 - Over 50 million served. - The fast food of battle rifles.

3. M16 - In service for over 40 years and still going strong. Some good, some bad. Gotten a lot better.

4. Mauser M1898 / Kar98k & M1903 Springfield - Wonderful, well made rifles. 2 World Wars and hundreds of battles. The Spanish M1895 in 7mm would probably be the one that really changed history. The Mauser became a world beater, Paul Mauser got rich, and the Americans ditched the Krag and got Springfields.

5. FN FAL & HK G3 (I love my HK91, but it is too heavy. I would be better off with a HK33.)
THe FN FAL was the "right hand of NATO" the HK G3 was purchased by all other NATO countries that didn't get FALs... or made their own rifle.

6. M1 Garand / M14 & SKS & SVT40 - These are all contemporaries. They are 2nd and 3rd generation auto-loading rifles. The Garand being the greatest produced in numbers. The SVT40 wasn't a large production rifle, but I was amazed that it functioned so well, but is more susceptible to dirt and mude than the M1.
The SKS is a good rifle with better accuracy than the AK47, but is limited by its charger loaded 10 round not detachable box magazine.

7. M1917 Enfield
We didn't have enough M1903s when we went to war again Germany in 1917, and we couldn't make enough. We made a bunch of P14s for Great Britain in .303 British. Why not rechamber them for .30-06? Big, heavy, but easy to shoot and well balanced. A long Mauser action that is strong and durable. Springfields get all the glory. Enfields did most of the work.

8. M1891 / M91/31 Mosin Nagant
Not a particular great rifle, but a durable, easily produced rifle that got the job done. Clunky action, and not particularly accurate, although some sniper versions are pretty good.

9. Steyr AUG / Gewehr 77 & FAMAS & L85 / SA80
Bullpups maybe the way of the future. I hope not, but they are cool in their own way. The Chinese and Israelis have their own now too, and these rifles lead the way.

10. M1 Carbine
WHAT?!!! Yeah. The first true rabbit shooter. I know, I know, I know... anemic ammo, blah, blah, blah. But this little carbine set the trend for the PDWs of today, like the FN P90. Remember, it was the M1 Carbines that the USAF wanted to replace with the M16s, that the Army rejected. Over 6.25 million M1 carbines were produced in 4 years of war! That's saying something. I'm not sure what, exactly... but love it or hate it, it found its way into the hearts of many American shooters and gun enthusiasts.

By the way, jumpingrunt. I can't agree with your statement about the .303 British cartridge. It is slow, compared to our .30-06 by about 200 feet per second, but it is a heavier bullet. The same could be said about the 8mm Mauser (7.92x57mm), and that was a very effective man stopper... hundreds of thousand of American, British, Italians, Russians, French, Dutch, Polish, and Greeks can't be wrong.

The British .303 service round was plenty good to kill alot of Boers, Germans, Japanese, and Italians. What did the .45-70 kill besides a lot of buffalo? Spanish? I don't think so. They had 7mm Mausers. And if the Krag was obsolete in the Spanish American War... the black power Trapdoor Springfields were hopelessly outclassed.

The British used .303 in Lewis Guns, Vickers Machineguns, Browning Machineguns in their Hurrcanes, Spitfires, and of course it was also in their Bren LMGs. As far as weight of the Lee Enfield was concerned... it is no heavier than other rifles of its day. Look at the Mauser M1898, the U.S. M1917, the Mosin Nagant M1891, the Lebel. All big, long, heavy rifles.
It was accurate enough. The British made many sniper rifles out of Lee Enfields, Ross, and P14 rifles.

If you are silly enough to go into battle with a 30-30 Winchester, or the like, that's up to you. British soldiers were trained to hit a man-sized target at 200 yards, shooting 10 rounds in 15 seconds. That's what the Germans faced at the Battle of the Marne.

I'm willing to bet that German casualties due to Enfield fire of that battle alone were enough to beat the total number of native Americans killed by .45-70 and .30-30 combined. Let's see... the .45-70 went into service around 1874 and was replaced by the .30-40 Krag in the mid 1890s?

Let's guess that German casualites were 250,000. And half of that due to artillery. So we have 125,000. Let's give the French 2/3 because they were the bulk of the Allied defense, and the British Expeditionary Forces were quite small in comparision... leaving us with 41,667 German casualities. British batalions did not have many Vickers machine guns... so I'm willing to guess that the majority of the shots fired were from Lee Enfield rifles.

But let's not loose focus on the discussion...

What makes a rifle great in the list isn't necessary the number of kills or service length, but how it changed the world, the military, the way battles are fought, the quality of the firearm, etc.

The reason you saw SMLEs going for wonderfully low prices, more like $125 to $350 today, for a No.1 MkIII* is because there are so many of them and that these rifles are very well worn, and by American standards... UGLY. These rifles have been described as 2x4s with a pipe stuck in them.

With everything else, jumpingrunt, I tend to agree, especially about the FN FAL in the Six Day War. A great rifle for Europe, or the Falklands, but not for the desert. The Israeli solution: Make a better AK and call it Galil.

Just a few cents more.

- conroy